Here's my analysis of the characters and their goals. In parentheses are the goals that come from knowing Malcolm is dead. Malcolm Crowe—30s thick, wavy hair, upper middle class, workaholic, neglectful husband, feels like a failure because he couldn't help Vincent Goal: Help Cole, Talk to his wife [pg 102] (Realize he's dead/Move on from his death) Cole Sear–10 years old, low-income, white, shy, problems in school but incredibly smart Goal: Overcome his fears [42], Feel like he fits in [pg 50, 72, 73], Communicate with his mother [pg 117], (Help Malcolm [pg 96]) Vincent—19 years old, addict, murderous and suicidal Goal: Not to be afraid, to fit in [pg 8] Anna—pretty, upper middle class, depressed, feels guilty for wanting to date her coworker Goal: (Move on from Malcolm's death) Lynn—Young mother, white, low-income, confused about Cole's problem Goal: Communicate with Cole [pg 56, 83, 99] Mr. Marschal—Elderly, German, thinks his wife is still alive Goal: Move on from his wife's death Mr. Cunningham—40s, teacher, white, former stutterer Goal: Help Cole fit in Kara—little girl, ghost, poisoned by her mother Goal: Tell her father what happened [pg 106] Mrs. Collins—young mother, mentally ill (Munchausen by proxy), poisoned one daughter to death and is now poisoning the second one. Mr. Collins—young father, grieving Based on the stakes alone, I'd say Cole is the main character. If he fails to overcome his fear of the ghosts, of being “looked at”, of talking to his mother, then he will wind up like Vincent—dead. Stakes don't get much higher than that! Moving on: this story is really about communication. How many of these goals are about a character talking to someone or making themselves heard? How much of the description shows characters not hearing one another? How many lines of dialogue involve characters talking about talking? All the ghosts want is to communicate with the living. Anna seems underdeveloped, but love interests usually are, aren't they? I also think the treatment of Mrs. Collins is a little bit harsh. Are we supposed to think she's a bad guy? How can we, when she's mentally ill? Or maybe that sequence is just supposed to show how pointless death can be? How there really is no nemesis except death itself?

I think you laid out the characters nicely. My only question/points go back to the MC. I do agree Malcolm is the protagonist as he drives the story and its goal, but... ...when we look at a story's inciting incident, it usually throws something into array for the MC. In this case, we're given a backstory to Malcolm early on and we see him at a high (seeing his professional achievement), only to see him dropped in the same scene by a failure. This sets up the entire overall story with Malcolm having both a need and a desire. The throughline that happens with Cole is the heart of the story, the relationship throughline which ultimately is resolved once Cole learns how to communicate and is accepted by his mother. While Cole is presented with his own backstory, he's not part of the inciting incident for the story. Nor is he the one who experiences a self-revelation. That's Malcolm and the audience experiences it at the same moment. As for the stakes, we don't know for certain Cole will end up like Vincent. It's somewhat insinuated as such because it's tied to Malcolm's need. While Cole's well-being is atstake, it's not really his stake, if that makes sense. In other words, Cole doesn't know what has happened to Vincent, or anything about him. The audience does because that's tied to Malcolm. Malcolm needs to understand the situation in order to help Cole. He knows the potential consequences otherwise and actively pursues a resolution. Furthermore, having experienced failure with Vincent, Cole serves the function for his redemption. These, to me, are all attributes that are associated with a main character.

Great stuff, Nadria. I've got more to add from another vantage point, but let me pick up on this theme of talking and wanting to be heard as I think that's central to the story. Some examples: * The distance between Malcolm and Anna throughout the script reflects a tension with the couple that Anna only mentions in the movie: How Malcolm has put everything, including her, behind his work. Even though in the moment, she celebrates his award, there is a clear subtext of hurt and pain in her character's delivery. Malcolm's obsession with Cole is in a way symbolic of how he had lived before the shooting, focused on his work and the distance we see between the couple while in fact Malcolm is dead is also symbolic of the gap between them that was emerging when he was alive. * Vincent Grey is pissed off for many reasons, but perhaps most powerfully because he feels like Malcolm didn't hear him, at least sufficiently enough to understand and help him. * That pivotal conversation between Lynn and Cole about her mother, how he conveys the mother's words to Lynn ties into this theme. * Then, of course, there is Cole who can not bring himself to say what he really ought to say to Malcolm: "Dude, you're dead." Instead the best he can communicate is to say, "I see dead people," and hope Malcolm can get the inference. In a way, you could almost swap out the word "see" for "hear" as it translates into pretty much the same thing. People who want to be heard also want to be seen -- for who they are. Anna as a person worthy of Malcolm's attention, Vincent as a troubled soul who desperately wants Malcolm to know his [Vincent's] dark demons, and Cole not as a crazy child, but as someone who does see dead people. Thanks for that observation, Nadria, and your breakdown of the characters. I'm going to work up a preliminary take per archetypes and hopefully post that tonight.

TBBB, I concur with you as I have always looked at the movie with the perspective that Malcolm is the Protagonist. That said it's one of the more interesting aspects of the script that Cole has such a strong personal subplot, and at key points, such as his conversation with his mother when they are in the car together [116-121], where it is independent of Malcolm. So I think there is value in looking at the story universe through Cole's eyes as a Protagonist... which of course he is in his own story. I want to zero in on a really interesting observation you made: "we don’t know for certain Cole will end up like Vincent. It’s somewhat insinuated as such because it’s tied to Malcolm’s need." There is a connection Malcolm makes between Vincent and Cole in the script. First there is the comparison Malcolm makes between notes about Vincent and notes about Cole [P. 11]:

He glances through the page. Words and phrases are circled throughout the file. "...Acute anxiety" "...Socially isolated" "...Possible mood disorder" "...Parent status -- Divorced" "...Communication difficulty between mother-child dyad" The man's hands flip the page. At the top of this new page reads, "Cole Sear, age 8, Referred September 1998." As the man's fingers move through the notes we again see words and phrases circled throughout this new case history. "...Acute anxiety" "...Socially isolated" "...Possible mood disorder" "...Parent status -- Divorced" "...Communication difficulty between mother-child dyad"

Identical symptoms. Note: This direct comparison is absent in the movie, although when we first see Malcolm, he is looking at notes re Vincent, then when he see Cole emerge from his house, he pulls out notes about Cole with key symptoms circled. Then an 'exchange' he has with Anna in the restaurant [27]:

MALCOLM They're so similar, Anna. They have the same mannerisms. The same expressions. The same thing hanging over them.

So that connection is pretty apparent. But what you said is quite intriguing: Malcolm driven by a fear that Cole could go the same route as Vincent. In Jungian language, that would mean Vincent is a "shadow" figure hanging over Malcolm and he projects Vincent onto Cole, not just in comparing analyses, but their futures. In effect, this creates a sort of ticking clock for Malcolm, increased pressure to help out Cole before Cole harms himself or others. Vamping off that, is it fair to suggest that one reason Malcolm is late to the game realizing he's dead is because he has gotten caught up in the Cole = Vincent assessment, therefore not allowing himself to see a blunt truth right in front of him: "I see dead people." Not psychosis, but a simple statement of fact. In addition to the illogicality of the comment, is Malcolm unable to 'hear' the truth of that because he is looking at Cole through Vincent colored lenses?

Scott, I think that is a fair assessment. As I pointed out the other day, it's something of a magic trick Night is pulling here: he's forcing the focus of the story onto what's in the left hand, keeping our attention from what's really going on in the right hand. And the idea of the shadow is something relevant, too, because the earlier scenes with Vincent set up the audience's expectations. As such, we're apt to see and latch onto patterns and those between Vincent and Cole are overtly so, so much that we have at least an inkling of a suggested outcome. I did something similar with my first script: open up on a double murder scene, though we don't know who's dead - just a guy and a girl. There's details in the scene: an uneaten birthday cake, balloons, a butterfly barrette, etc., that help establish a certain expectation in the audience's mind. In short, they know the outcome. As the investigation (story) proceeds from an earlier point, those things provide "markers" for the audience to tune into - knowing something is going to happen but not knowing how, or to whom. Sort of like in Titanic, we get to see the ship go down via computerization, so once we're to that point in the story, gasp, suspense! Not quite the same per se, but conceptually it's planting something in the audience's head. But back to Malcolm, his explanation for his blind spot is sort of superficially glossed over when Cole says he sees dead people... walking around... they just don't know they're dead. To me, that satisfies a story requirement in a sense, but it's much more of an interesting perspective to be looking through Vincent colored lenses. After all, we're more susceptible to forming schemas that support our own personal beliefs. Malcolm is driven by psychology being/providing the answer and thus he doesn't (necessarily) believe in ghosts - therefore there's no reason to believe he himself is dead. It doesn't fit into his worldview which ultimately changes because of Cole. Oh, and my comment was initially to Nadria; I keep forgetting to hit reply instead of jumping straight to the open box! But good to read your thoughts and opinions.

I want to pick up on the next sentence of TBBB’s line that Scott discussed. “While Cole’s well-being is atstake, it’s not really his stake, if that makes sense.” I think this does make sense, and it’s what makes the story so interesting. Throughout the movie, I was worried about Cole. I felt Malcolm could and was taking care of himself. (Though it is a good point that he wasn’t doing such a hot job even when he was alive and successful.) But it turns out that Cole was taking care of Malcolm, the recognition of which means that my worry was misplaced. Except that Cole is living in the “real” world while Malcolm in that sense can’t be helped, though he can be put at rest. So any minor danger to Cole seems magnified. What I’m trying to say is that while the audience believes that Cole is in danger, he is one tough and smart little guy. So when he gets the courage to tell his mother what he sees, is that really a result of Malcolm’s effort, or does it come from inside him? As if Cole’s courage had already been there when he decides to try and help Malcolm by letting Malcolm go through the “faux” process of helping him, in order for Malcolm to heal himself. That’s what TBBB’s line pointed out to me. If that makes sense ;-) Thanks for that, TBBB.

I'm really interested in this issue of who's the protagonist, and whether there's a nemesis (which there isn't, really), not least because it ties into a lot of stuff I've been thinking about recently. Because of something I'm writing, I've come to the conclusion that there's another character model in addition to the normal protagonist-antagonist model - the protagonist-attracter model. This screenwriting model doesn't have a nemesis, because the conflict is between the protagonist and the attractor, who's deeply desired but also resisted, and is an agent of change in the protagonist's life. It's most familiar from rom-coms, but it also applies to undercover cop movies, and I think to a lot of television. At the risk of shameless self-promotion, if anyone is interested, my initial thoughts are on my blog, http://debbiemoon.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/truly-madly-furiously/ End of advert. Anyway, this is all a prelude to suggesting that The Sixth Sense fits the protagonist-attractor model, which explains the lack of nemesis. I'm going to suggest that Malcolm is the protagonist, and Cole (as the social outsider) is the attractor - a character who I think often has a substantial arc of their own, influencing and being influenced by the protagonist, which explains why we're struggling to decide who's the main character. The movie's conflict is - will the protagonist learn from the attractor and embrace a new way of life (or in this case, death)? Secondary conflict: will the attractor learn from the more conventional protagonist, and become a more socialised and moral person? Thinking on my feet a bit here, but now I'm looking for this structure, I'm seeing it in a lot of places...

You're welcome! Another thing that just crossed my mind, when looking at it from a predicament level, if you had a trailer for this movie that used the infamous words "and only one man...", who would it be referring to? They're really helping one another, but again, that focus is so much more on Cole - partly because of what's already been noted, but also because he's a young child, vulnerable, etc. It's kind of like having a master teach a student a lesson, but the master ultimately learning a lesson from the student in the process. A great example of this is Good Will Hunting.

In terms of antagonist, there's no one attempting to stop Malcolm from helping Cole... other than Cole himself, because of his own fears of being viewed as a freak. But... really when we're talking about protagonists/antagonists, they're really functions of a story. It's much better to think of them as such rather than characters because characters are limited. For example, setting is vastly underused in a lot of stories, yet can be a powerful antagonistic force. The prison in Shawshank redemption, for instance. These should spring out of the story's theme and can help bolster it via that context or by use of symbolism. So, keeping that in mind, what is antagonistic of Malcolm's efforts? His failing relationship with his wife. At one point, he tells Cole he can't continue to see him because he's neglected his own family. It's not that an antagonist needs to be a person so much as it be a force, anything from preventing the character from obtaining his goal.

Good points everyone. I think I'm just so averse to saying Malcolm is the main character because I simply find him unlikable. He checks off a lot of boxes that are annoying: rich, workaholic, self-absorbed. In my view, Malcolm doesn't want to help Cole because he cares about Cole. He wants to help the boy out of a need to prove himself. Check out his attitude when he gets the award. He asks if Anna believes he deserves the award, then says, "I wonder because if you believe, then I can believe." Insecure much? [pg 4] When he decides to refer Cole elsewhere, it's "I've failed." [pg 77] When he finally talks to his wife (his goal, if his dialogue can be believed) he does ask what's made her sad, but not before saying "I need my best friend" and "What did I do?" [pg 122] If the wedding video that plays at the end is supposed to continue Malcolm's narrative, to represent him after he's experienced his big epiphany, then he's still (and always has been) totally self-centered. The wedding toast: instead of being, "Anna's the most wonderful woman ever," it's "I am in love. In love I am." I. I. I. So I guess my questions are: Does anyone else find Malcolm unlikable? Did Shyamalan purposely write him to be unlikable? Can an unlikeable character be a true protagonist?

If Malcolm is the Protagonist, then what is the breakdown for their roles? Protagonist: Malcolm Nemesis: Hmm. I'm not sure this is a person. Death, maybe? Or inability to communicate? Attractor: Anna (Maybe. Is she really that tied to his emotional growth? But I don't see Cole really working through his emotions. I see him working through Death.) Mentor: Cole Trickster: I'm not really sure of this one either, actually.

"Can an unlikeable character be a true protagonist?" Sure! Likability has nothing to do with it. Good or evil has nothing to do with it. We discussed this during the Pan's Labyrinth analysis where my view was that Captain Vidal is the Protagonist - he's the one with the story goal and has an active antagonist in the rebels who are trying to stop him from that goal (continuing his bloodline.) The Main Character in that film is Ofelia - it's through her eyes we are experiencing the story. In my opinion, Main Character and Protagonist can be two separate characters. The Protagonist is usually the character with the story goal. The Main Character is through whose eyes we are experiencing the story. In most films they are the one and same, but not always. What I've noticed in the past weeks of this reading and analysis series is that the discussion participants all seem to have various views on what constitutes a main character and protagonist. It seems to depend on what school of thought we come from. I'm not sure how much importance we should put on that particular aspect of the discussion. Does it help us in understanding the story better? The author's intent? Maybe... I'm on the fence there. It gets a bit tricky with The Sixth Sense because we are analyzing it on several levels: what the characters know as they are experiencing the story as it's progressing; what we think we know the first time we're reading the script/watching the film; what we know in retrospect after the twist has been revealed. It seems like the goals for each character change depending on how we choose to look at this story. Other commenters have pointed out both characters' goals and given good arguments for each character to be named Main Character and/or Protagonist. I have to agree with what Bark said yesterday: What ultimately defines a main character is perspective: this is whom we want the audience to experience the story through. As such, it’s absolutely necessary to have Malcolm carry the function in this story because he’s got a huge blind spot the audience can’t be privy to and subsequently shares in the revelation with. I would say that in this case Malcolm is both Main Character and Protagonist. I do believe we experience the story through his eyes, he has a goal, whether or not he knows it/we know it, and I do believe he's the one that ultimately change. Cole grows as a character because he knew all along he was right - he sees ghosts - he just needed everyone else around him to accept that. He might think he's a freak in the beginning of the story and at the end he has changed that view of himself, but the important thing is that he never doubts himself in regards to his special abilities. He never thinks he's delusional. He knows he sees ghosts. Therefore he is a steadfast character that grows during the story, but he doesn't change.

I didn't find Malcolm unlikeable. Flawed, but not unlikeable. Sure, an unlikeable character can be a protagonist. A couple of examples: Ebenezer Scrooge in A Christmas Carol and Andy Dufresne in The Shawshank Redemption (though he doesn't serve the function of main character). Andy, in particular, comes across just as his wife described him: cold, distancing, etc., and he readily admits he pushes people away. He's characterized early on as a cold, calculating person and his demeanor more or less suggests this. The key is, your audience doesn't need to like your character so much as they need to empathize - two totally different things. Empathy suggests being relatable, to understand and be sensitive of xx. We don't like Scrooge because of his demeanor, but as the story progresses, we quickly finding ourselves empathizing with him because we bear witness to the pain and regret his past that he's buried within himself. That's hitting on some universal stuff that we all experience at some point or another, so it provides us readers as a cautionary tale of "this is how you may end up" if you follow this path, while also providing a path toward to escaping that path. A Christmas Carol is a story that simply couldn't be told if you didn't have a character with that perspective who was unlikeable from the start. In Andy's case, despite coming off as cold, he does project what Red states as being a sense of care-free attitude. This scene in particular early on is important. Why? Because Red himself questions whether or not he likes Andy and comes to the conclusion, yeah, you could say I liked him from the start. If you do have a protagonist that has unlikeable traits or qualities, one of the ways to alleviate that is by having other characters around him like him.

Something Debbie said a few posts back hit me. Cole is literally an attractor. And of ghosts like Malcolm. We are fooled into thinking that Malcolm has spent the last two years recovering and that Cole is his new patient. We don't know for sure that he has been searching for a "Cole." But we know later on that ghosts do, since the little girl seeks Cole. Someone earlier mentioned that they thought it was a weakness (or at least inconsistency) that the little girl left her "location" to go to Cole. Perhaps this is the explanation. Cole just doesn't see dead people, he draws the ones needing help to him.

Two comments. On Teddy's point about the difference between the protagonist and main character. In My Week With Marilyn, Colin Clark is the protagonist and Marilyn is the "main" character. In this example it is the P's story but we are mostly interested in it because of the main character. It reminds me of Boswell's "Life of Johnson." It isn't a pure bio, since Boswell is telling the story, but the story is of Johnson's life. Perhaps Apocalypse Now is another example. To Nadria's question, I didn't find Malcolm unlikable though I take your point. I guess I gave him the benefit of the doubt since I only had a brief chance to get to know him before he was blown away by Vincent. And I was willing to attribute his behavior afterward to the trauma. I did find him frustrating at times. Especially when he "dealt" with Anna.

I thought about that too, Mike. But Cole is also the one that teaches Malcolm about dead people coming to life. So... does Cole play multiple roles?

But in reality, no one said your Protagonist has to be likeable. They just have to carry the spine.

A little late to the party, but I'm glad to see everyone's contributions to the analysis. Some terrific stuff. What I propose to do here is provide a breakdown of the characters in terms of their respective narrative functions, using my take on five primary character archetypes: Protagonist, Nemesis, Attractor, Mentor, Trickster. First looking at the story with the perspective that Malcolm is the Protagonist. Protagonist: Malcolm Nemesis: Vincent Attractor: Anna Mentor: Cole Trickster: Death What does Malcolm want [Conscious Goal]? He wants to help cure Cole. What does Malcolm need [Unconscious Goal]? He needs to realize he is dead and have closure with Anna. Vincent [Nemesis]: This is an interesting iteration of an antagonist function because in one way of looking at it, the Final Struggle between them occurs in The Opening, when Vincent shoots Malcolm. Subsequently Vincent's presence as a Nemesis takes two forms: (1) A shadow of regret, guilt and even shame that looms over Malcolm because of his failure to help Vincent adequately enough. He projects that desire to resolve his unfinished shadow-business onto Cole. (2) The fact that Malcolm is dead, caused by Vincent, is an unknown reality during the majority of the story and creates its own oppositional dynamic, primarily through Cole's reaction to Malcolm as a ghost, and in Malcolm's 'interactions' with Anna who seems more and more distant to him, which he thinks is due to their deteriorating relationship when in fact it is a result of him being absent to her. Anna [Attractor]: While I agree it is an interesting idea to think of Cole as an attractor in the sense he literally attracts ghosts with unfinished business to him, and which by the way would seem to be the situation with Malcolm, looking at the story through Malcolm's eyes, as close as he gets to Cole, the subplot that is most tied to Malcolm's emotional growth is with Anna. The fact he tries to reach out to her, but she won't respond. The fact she is drawn to her young suitor. The fact Malcolm seeing her with the young man causes him to react in anger. And the biggie: The last scene in the story is not between Malcolm and Cole, it is with Malcolm and Anna wherein he states [in the movie], "You were never second to me." Cole [Mentor]: I know an argument can be made that Cole is Malcolm's Attractor, but when considering a primary character archetype, I look at it like we have to drill down to the most basic function of each character. And to that end, I think what Cole's primary function is is to help provide the wisdom necessary for Malcolm to realize he is a ghost. Beyond that Cole is the conduit to everything that is going on in Cole's universe, all the supernatural stuff, providing clue after clue after clue. This can be seen as a reflection of his wisdom function. Death [Trickster]: The biggest tip-off is the fact that the revelation of Malcolm's death is the Big Twist, a trick played on Malcolm -- and the audience. But along the way, death tricks him in dealing with Cole. Death tricks him in trying to interact with Anna. Death tricks him in dealing with himself. So that is one person's take on the story's primary character archetypes. If I get a chance, I will follow up with a comment in which I look at the story through Cole's eyes as Protagonist and see how the other characters may line up as archetypes.